LG has announced today the launch of its W2363V gaming monitor in the UK.
With an ultra-sharp response time of just 2ms, the monitor is perfect for videogames as it matches the time it takes your brain to respond to images, resulting in a complete lack of lag when playing.
TechRadar managed to get up close and personal with the monitor today, and was impressed with the design of LG's latest Flatron.
Its size is decent enough for the bedroom or study – at 23-inches – and contrast ratio is at 70,000:1.
Connectivity on the monitor comes in the form of 2 x HDMI ports, D-sub, DVI, and component, and the monitor also features similar technology as seen in LG's TV range – in that the monitor features auto brightness technology.
Speaking at the LG event today was Futurologist Ian Pearson, who explained that he used to work in the missile industry and that a 2ms response time on monitors was vital in his job.
"We used to design head-up displays for fighter pilots to try and kill things on the battlefield. One of the really key bits of information I remember back then is 'two milliseconds'," explained Pearson.
"This is the response time you need for a display to keep up with the brain of a fighter pilot."
He continued: "When it comes to gaming 30ms is alright, 10ms will cut it if you don't really care about the result. But if you really care about the result of that game and you are playing at the top level, then 2ms is when your brain can't tell the difference."
While LG certainly isn't the first company to offer monitors with a 2ms response time, it is interesting to hear quite why this stat is an important one in the gaming sector.
The LG W2363V Flatron monitor has a release date of later in the year, and will cost you £210. Go to www.lg.com/uk for more details.
Your comments (4) Click to add a new comment
menelaus
September 14th
4. I thought the lag in LCD panels was in the video processing. Taking the digital information from the input and converting it to the picture.
On a TV this is not a problem as everything is linear and a lag in video processing is not the end of the world. On a laggy LCD monitor on a fast FPS 1/4s could mean the difference between finding your mark or hitting the dirt.
I think CRT's didn't have this problem as the signal was analogue and required no video processing, and therefore minimal lag.
Alert a moderator
rabbitfly
September 14th
3. I am sorry but thats pure bull. Anyone that is even remotely a videophile knows what response time does and what it doesn't.
First off it's been used by the tv and computer display manufacturers as a gimmick ever since it was introduced.
What response time is and what it affects?
Response time is the time the crystals in the lcd screen takes to change from black to white. What does that mean for gaming. Well with an exceptionally slow response time ghosting and motion blur will be more prominent.
The problem is that the industry wants you as a gamer to believe that it affects input delay, but thats an entirely different stat alltogether.
input delay is affected by the processing engines in the screen f. ex a hdtv with 100hz that has a gaming mode would turn off 100hz when the gaming mode is activated.
F. ex a monitor with 10ms response time can have a lower input delay than a 2ms monitor.
If that is the case then the 10ms monitor will be better for gaming 99% of the time.
All that doesn't necesarily mean that the W2363V is bad, I mean it might have almost no input lag, but after input lag comes color fidelity and accuracy, And after that contrast and black levels. As long as the response time is below 10 then all of the above are so much more important when it comes to making a good lcd monitor.
Again I am not saying the LG w2363v is a bad gaming monitor, I am just saying that this all mumbo jumbo and a sales pitch full of lies, don't listen to them and wait for some independant people that actually know what to look for in a screen to test it.
Alert a moderator
optimaximal
September 14th
2. What a load of rubbish - response time has been largely irrelevant since TFT technology dropped below 10 milliseconds (that's *THOUSANDTHS* of a second - almost 1000 ms passed in the time you read this) because even the most highly trained human eye cannot see it, despite what even the most fervent of video-buffs will tell you.
My £100 Acer monitor was sold as 5ms 2 years ago and it's no better too my eye (20:20 vision etc.) than the 7ms LG model it replaced.
To correct the quote above...
"When it comes to gaming 30ms is alright, 10ms will cut it if you don't really care about the result. But if you really care about the size of your e-***** and you want just another number to boast about, then 2ms is where the sh*t is at, yo!."
Alert a moderator
mbb
September 14th
1. 'Futurologist'? Surely that isn't a real thing?
Alert a moderator
Tell us what you think
You need to Log in or register to post comments